FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Philosophy & Religious Studies > History of Abrahamic Religions & Related Texts
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 01:23 AM

Poll: Was The Baptism of Jesus by John Likely Historical?
Be advised that this is a public poll: other users can see the choice(s) you selected.
Poll Options
Was The Baptism of Jesus by John Likely Historical?

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 08-04-2012, 10:05 PM   #201
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Auburn ca
Posts: 4,269
Default

I still buy a historical core that JtB did dunk yeshua.


yeshua carried on this tradition


I look at them both as a different kind of zealot, much craftier then those zealots that perished before them.
outhouse is offline  
Old 08-04-2012, 11:23 PM   #202
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by outhouse View Post
I still buy a historical core that JtB did dunk yeshua.


yeshua carried on this tradition


I look at them both as a different kind of zealot, much craftier then those zealots that perished before them.
You BUY into Myth Fables.

The very stories that claimed John Baptized Jesus claimed Jesus WALKED on Water.

Please, don't buy Myth Fables. Please, just go FIND a history book first.

Sorry there is NONE for Jesus. I forgot.

Jesus was a PHANTOM in the Bible.
aa5874 is offline  
Old 08-05-2012, 08:55 AM   #203
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 393
Default

It's fictional. Like everything else in the gospels.

It does not pass the criterion of embarrassment. Mark was writing midrash. He found "prepare a way in the wilderness" in Isaiah and thought that meant that his story needed some Jesus-like precedent to "prepare" for the main event. So he went rummaging through Josephus (or some other lost source) and found an apocalyptic loon that fit the plot.
James The Least is offline  
Old 08-05-2012, 08:56 AM   #204
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 393
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by outhouse View Post
I still buy a historical core that JtB did dunk yeshua.


yeshua carried on this tradition


I look at them both as a different kind of zealot, much craftier then those zealots that perished before them.

if you buy this, you'll buy anything. i have a bridge to sell you in brooklyn.
James The Least is offline  
Old 08-05-2012, 09:36 AM   #205
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Auburn ca
Posts: 4,269
Default

Weak! lol

much of the bible has historicity. while it does cantain some fiction, you need to understand if they believed it, its mythology not fiction.


Its pretty obvious these ignorant people who followed mythology believed their sould would be saved by their gods
outhouse is offline  
Old 08-05-2012, 10:57 AM   #206
Moderator -
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
Posts: 4,639
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by James The Least View Post
It's fictional. Like everything else in the gospels.

It does not pass the criterion of embarrassment. Mark was writing midrash. He found "prepare a way in the wilderness" in Isaiah and thought that meant that his story needed some Jesus-like precedent to "prepare" for the main event. So he went rummaging through Josephus (or some other lost source) and found an apocalyptic loon that fit the plot.
Josephus does not say John was apocalyptic or Messianic.

The Dead Sea Scrolls, on the other hand, are full of that "make a road through the wilderness" stuff as well as some other things that are similar to how Mark portrays John the Baptist. There really were people living in the wilderness, using baptism as a substitute for Temple sacrifice, saying they were "making a highway through the wilderness" for the return of the Messiahs (the Qumran literature actually expected two Anointed ones a King and a Priest, as per the old days).

Josephus says a lot about the Essenes, and even says he spent three years as an Essene himself, following a teacher who had a severely ascetic lifesyle, again similar to how Mark describes the Baptist. From Life:
Quote:
When I was about sixteen years old I had a mind to make a trial of the several sects that were among us. There are three of these, that of the Pharisees, the Sadducees, and the third that of the Essenes, as we have frequently told you. I thought that being acquainted with them all I could choose the best.

So I consigned myself to hardship, and underwent great difficulties, and went through them all. Nor did I content myself with the trying of these three only, for when I was informed that one whose name was Banus lived in the desert, and used no other clothing than what grew upon trees, and had no other food than what grew of its own accord, and bathed himself in cold water frequently, both night and day, to purify himself, I imitated him in those things, and continued with him three years.
Josephus does not identify John the Baptist as an Essene or an ascetic:
Quote:
Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod's army came from God, and was a very just punishment for what he did against John called the baptist [the dipper]. For Herod had him killed, although he was a good man and had urged the Jews to exert themselves to virtue, both as to justice toward one another and reverence towards God, and having done so join together in washing. For immersion in water, it was clear to him, could not be used for the forgiveness of sins, but as a sanctification of the body, and only if the soul was already thoroughly purified by right actions. And when others massed about him, for they were very greatly moved by his words, Herod, who feared that such strong influence over the people might carry to a revolt -- for they seemed ready to do any thing he should advise -- believed it much better to move now than later have it raise a rebellion and engage him in actions he would regret.

And so John, out of Herod's suspiciousness, was sent in chains to Machaerus, the fort previously mentioned, and there put to death; but it was the opinion of the Jews that out of retribution for John God willed the destruction of the army so as to afflict Herod. (Antiquities 18:5:2)
John is not desribed by Josephus as having any of the qualities you say Mark was looking for. Josephus does not say John was ascetic, apocalyptic, or Messianic. He and the Qumran scrolls say the Essenes were all of those things.

Mark did not invent the "make a way in the wilderness" interpretation of Isaiah himself, that was already Essene boiler plate 100 years or more BCE.

There are also multiple and contradictory attestations of John the Baptist in the Gospels, including a Q source having John send his own disciples to inquire whether Jesus was the "one we seek, or should we wait for another," after John has already presumably seen the Holy Spirit descend on Jesus at his baptism.

So Mark did not invent the John the Baptist connection himself (there is an independent one in Q), nor could he have derived his description from Josephus. If he was looking for a character such as you suggest, then Banus would have been the one (though he's in Life and the JBap description is in Antiquities).

There's some kind of Essene connection there, be it invented or historical (and there's no reason John could not have been an Essene, there were thousands of them, according to Josephus). Even if Mark is just conflating John with Essene ideas, those ideas were still not invented by Mark. They are in the Qumran Scrolls.
Diogenes the Cynic is offline  
Old 08-05-2012, 12:07 PM   #207
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Auburn ca
Posts: 4,269
Default

he should also realize zealots were against temple worship because they viewed the jewish government as corrupt due to the roman infection and greed.

that and the gospel authors had nothing in common with the original sect
outhouse is offline  
Old 08-05-2012, 03:30 PM   #208
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic View Post

There are also multiple and contradictory attestations of John the Baptist in the Gospels, including a Q source having John send his own disciples to inquire whether Jesus was the "one we seek, or should we wait for another," after John has already presumably seen the Holy Spirit descend on Jesus at his baptism.

So Mark did not invent the John the Baptist connection himself (there is an independent one in Q), nor could he have derived his description from Josephus. If he was looking for a character such as you suggest, then Banus would have been the one (though he's in Life and the JBap description is in Antiquities)....
Please, forget about Hypothetical "Q". You are CONVENIENTLY inventing sources just to support your OWN position.

Your Presumptions about "Q" are really worthless.
aa5874 is offline  
Old 08-05-2012, 06:12 PM   #209
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Left Coast
Posts: 77
Default

Even if there was an historical Jesus, it's likely this is as fictitious as just about everything else written about him.
proudfootz is offline  
Old 08-05-2012, 06:32 PM   #210
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Auburn ca
Posts: 4,269
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by proudfootz View Post
Even if there was an historical Jesus, it's likely this is as fictitious as just about everything else written about him.

based on what? what is fictitious exactly? and how did you determine that?
outhouse is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:58 AM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.